Conference on economic impact of new EPA water rules scheduled for late July

The chorus of voices speaking out against a set of strict pollution standards to govern state waterways continues to grow. An Orlando meeting (.pdf) scheduled for July 25-27 will deal almost solely with the economic impact of the nutrient criteria, which industry leaders say will cost Floridians billions. #

The meeting will be lead by The National Academies’ Water Science & Technology Board — a committee “comprised of experts in science, technology, academics, and the environment under the direction of Dr. Laura Ehlers.” The board is slated to meet at least four times during the coming year. #

Several affected industries will be present, each offering its own analysis of the criteria. Representatives from the Florida Water Environmental Association, the Florida phosphate industry, and the Florida Pulp and Paper Association will be on hand to discuss the issue of cost compliance. (Each has its own 20-minute session listed on the agenda.) #

Also listed on the agenda is a 15-minute segment titled “Comments from Senator Bill Nelson’s Office,” with Nelson staffer Sara Gonzalez-Rothi. Though Nelson has often advocated clean water, he penned a letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson in September 2010, requesting further delays in implementing the criteria — so that an independent cost analysis could be performed. #

Those opposed to the criteria have long cited cost as a primary concern. But many of the projections of inordinate costs are based on studies performed by and for affected industries, which would likely have to upgrade their treatment processes to meet the new standards. Because Florida’s current water pollution is merely narrative, and stipulates that a waterbody cannot be affected “so as to cause an imbalance in natural populations of flora or fauna,” industries don’t face tough regulations. Hence, an abundance of algal blooms, fish kills, and dolphin deaths in Florida waterways. #

In a letter published July 1 in The Ledger, William Dever, president of the Florida Gulf Coast Building & Construction Trades Council, writes that the criteria are “unprecedented” and will “stifle job creation and growth.” #

From Dever’s letter: #

Our unions represent thousands of working men and women whose jobs often depend on investment in construction and maintenance in Florida’s Gulf Coast region. Based on projections made by Florida agencies and private sector industries, we are extremely concerned that the high cost of implementing these new regulations will lead directly to a reduction in new investment and construction jobs in our state. #

As previously reported by The Florida Independent, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (the agency that is, like its name suggests, tasked with protecting the environment from nutrients and pollutants) once supplied lawmakers with numbers written by these very industries, when asked how much the standards may cost Florida businesses. Internal emails revealed that those estimates were disputed within the department. #

Environmentalists are still fighting to keep the numeric nutrient criteria alive, arguing that the cost of compliance will be nothing compared to the cost of abandoning the new rules altogether. #

In a letter published in The Florida Times-Union, St. Johns Riverkeeper Executive Director Jimmy Orth writes that he is ”astounded by the misleading statements” of some politicians and special interest groups who, he says, “seem to be advocating for a status quo of frequent fish kills, red tides and toxic algal blooms in Florida’s waters.” #

Writes Orth: #

The value of these safeguards is a no-brainer when weighed against the significant economic costs of pollution and of doing nothing. #

Algal blooms and pollution hurt businesses, cost jobs, impact human health, reduce property values and our tax base and diminish recreational opportunities and our quality of life. #

Ignoring the consequences and external costs of pollution is irresponsible and a disservice to the citizens of this state. Florida must finally begin to get serious about resolving this costly and ongoing nutrient pollution problem. #

#